IMDb > Knowing (2009) > Reviews & Ratings - IMDb
Knowing
Quicklinks
Top Links
trailers and videosfull cast and crewtriviaofficial sitesmemorable quotes
Overview
main detailscombined detailsfull cast and crewcompany credits
Awards & Reviews
user reviewsexternal reviewsawardsuser ratingsparents guidemessage board
Plot & Quotes
plot summarysynopsisplot keywordsmemorable quotes
Did You Know?
triviagoofssoundtrack listingcrazy creditsalternate versionsmovie connectionsFAQ
Other Info
box office/businessrelease datesfilming locationstechnical specsliterature listingsNewsDesk
Promotional
taglines trailers and videos posters photo gallery
External Links
showtimesofficial sitesmiscellaneousphotographssound clipsvideo clips

Reviews & Ratings for
Knowing More at IMDbPro »

Filter: Hide Spoilers:
Page 1 of 78:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]
Index 774 reviews in total 

392 out of 594 people found the following review useful:

The Good, The Bad and the Ugly

6/10
Author: pugmahorn from Australia
26 March 2009

The good: Strong start to the movie, the plot hooks you in, excellent sound, confronting disaster scenes, haunting images, Rose Byrne, at times quite freaky, The Bad: Special effects looked like they were from a video game, ripped off basically every science fiction movie ever made, poor acting from Nic Cage, very predictable.

The Ugly: Last third of movie was shamefully ridiculous.

Summary: If you are a science fiction fan, you will probably not be able to resist seeing this movie. Be warned, you will think you are seeing the sci-fi great that you have been waiting for but mid way the film gets lost. You may very well groan out loud at the ending. This had the makings of a great movie but unfortunately it couldn't come up with the goods.

Was the above review useful to you?

445 out of 701 people found the following review useful:

Sucks like a neutron star

1/10
Author: prezidanto from United States
25 March 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

I can't believe people are calling this the "best SF movie of the year", unless there aren't any other SF movies this year. Ebert obviously needs to adjust his meds if he gave this four stars.

Plot holes? Plot holes? The rocks... do they mean *anything*? How come the aliens can't find *some* way to communicate with people? How do they expect to leave their numeric clue hidden for 50 years and have just the right person run across them? Why does the son get all bent about being treated as a child... for 30 seconds? My God -- it's full of holes! This abomination makes Swiss cheese look like battleship armor.

"Thought-provoking" only in the sense that if you start thinking about it, you'll be astounded at how little sense in makes, and how much thinking you have to do to force any of it to work.

I've been reading science fiction for 30 years. I know SF. SF is a friend of mine. And if this is the best SF movie of the year, I'm a monkey's uncle. And aunt. And male offspring. And second cousin once removed.

Was the above review useful to you?

251 out of 351 people found the following review useful:

This is propaganda

1/10
Author: clement-reber from Switzerland
5 April 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This movie is bad propaganda for Scientology. This is already obvious after five minutes watching. First, evolution is called "Theory of Randomness" and described as something sad by Nicolas Cage. Of course, there's no mention at all of all the proofs of evolution, even when Cage is supposed to be this serious MIT teacher. The little girl Lucinda is born in 1952, year of Scientology creation. The time capsule is sealed under a seven branch star, the symbol of Scientology. Then, the story is very closed of the one in the book "Scientology, A History of Man" written by L.Ron Hubbard, Scientology founder. The movie described a numerological prophecy of apocalypse, something frequent in Scientology's mythology. The more ridiculous is the final image of the Eden Garden with Adam and Eve running to the knowledge tree! When you're watching such a movie, remember that Quentin Hubbard, the son of Scientology founder, was probably murdered for having told the world that his father is a liar and and criminal. And - mainly - remember Darwin...

Was the above review useful to you?

247 out of 354 people found the following review useful:

Did Writers Know When It Jumped The Shark?

6/10
Author: hardykh from United States
21 March 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

This film started out with a real grabber. The whole time capsule thing was working as was the predictions and it had me riveted waiting to find out what was going to happen next.

Then everything went left and the movie bounded over the shark as Cage begins a wild chase to tell everyone about the end of the world.

I absolutely believe this screenplay wasn't written with the ending that was in the movie. I figure around one third of the way through someone said, "hey this is way too M. Night Shymalan, better beef up the special effects!" That's when the explosions started.

Then another Hollywood big-wig said, "hey, we need to add some extraterrestrials or this will never hit" and so enter the blond guys in the woods. These scenes look like they were re-shot after the fact.

Finally as Cage is on his knees waving to his son on the space ship, I expected the credits to roll, but no. I feel pretty sure a focus group was show the first cut and they said it was a downer, so...after a rewrite and lots of money on special effects. Voila! End of the world.

Ten, after another focus group, comes the two kids in Eden ending that looked completely out of place and I feel pretty sure was tacked on after audience reactions ranged from"but what about the kids?" to "that's a downer".

All in all, the whole thing went way off the rails and squandered any viewer interest in favor of bad theology and worse writing.

If anyone can confirm my theories of rewrites and re-shoots, please let me know. Otherwise, I have to believe the producers just got lost somewhere along the way to what promised to be a good film.

Was the above review useful to you?

451 out of 802 people found the following review useful:

Kudos To Proyas For This Surprisingly Good Flick!

9/10
Author: RosenKratz from Washington, DC
6 March 2009

It may seem improbable, but Knowing actually adds something fresh and inspiring to the disaster genre.

Certainly the action scenes are well staged – they are as grand and tense as the previews would have you expect. But Knowing really stands out from the likes of Next and various Roland Emmerich movies because of its heart (there is a profoundly human element amongst the chaos and destruction), and because of the surprising, riveting turns the story takes. In no way was it a generic "save the world" flick, like I feared going in. It is an original with a memorable ending that should not be spoiled, but it will almost definitely have people talking.

In my mind, director Alex Proyas deserves a lot of the credit for the fact that the film is brave, and does not try to replicate a typical Hollywood blueprint. In fact, he even has Nic Cage back on solid footing, an actor I used to love but have been quite weary of lately. But I think Proyas deserves the main kudos for turning this into something creative and special, and I'd go as far as to say this it is his best movie since Dark City.

There really isn't much to complain about regarding the film, but the one exception might be the middle, where the action sags a bit. Still, I think the captivating final third more than makes up for it.

I definitely recommend the film - you will be pleasantly surprised!

Was the above review useful to you?

147 out of 202 people found the following review useful:

Am I bonkers? I thought it was kind of stupid

6/10
Author: Kristine (kristinedrama14@msn.com) from Chicago, Illinois
22 March 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Nicolas Cage, I feel like an addictive gambler when it comes to this man, because there are times where he has some really great movies(i.e. Face/Off) then he has moments where I wonder if he was drinking when he accepted other movies(i.e. Wicker Man). He has some really great acting moments, but it seems like his movies lately, he just looks tired and like he stayed up the whole night memorizing his lines not realizing he hasn't had any sleep for 6 weeks. I don't know, I'm not quite sure why this has a high rating right now, but we'll see in the next few weeks, because honestly I wasn't all that thrilled with Knowing. From the trailer this looked really exciting, but instead we got a movie that just took itself too seriously. I thought it was mainly just poor writing for the story and the characters.

In 1959, a competition is held amongst the students of a new elementary school to celebrate its opening. The winning plan, from student Lucinda Embry, is to bury a time capsule containing the students' drawings of the future to be opened 50 years later in 2009. She is prevented from finishing her image, which is actually a series of seemingly random numbers, and goes missing during the ceremony. Her teacher later finds her in a gym closet frantically scratching the remaining numbers on the door. Fifty years later, the time capsule is opened and the pictures are handed down to the new generation of students. Caleb, the son of MIT professor and astrophysicist John Koestler, receives Lucinda's envelope. While initially dismissing them as random numbers, John accidentally discovers that the numbers have accurately predicted the dates, death tolls, and locations of every major disaster in the last 50 years; three of the events have not yet occurred. Decoding and discovering that one of the three may lead to the end of the world.

Is this a movie that you have to see in the theater? There is one scene that only the big screen can do justice and that was the airplane crash scene, even though it was unrealistic it was great to watch. I just love how Nicolas Cage reacts to it, he goes to "save" the people who are burning and one person passes him screaming in flames and Nic just says "hey!", what exactly was he planning on saying to him? Like "HEY! Just to let you know, you're on fire". I thought the ending was weak and there wasn't enough character development. The story was too serious, while intense, the characters were not real and I felt like the effects got too cheesy at the end. I would say if you're going to see this in the theater, see the matinée, otherwise, just stick with the rental.

6/10

Was the above review useful to you?

266 out of 453 people found the following review useful:

Worth Seeing – Before the End!

7/10
Author: Greg Treadway (treadwaywrites) from United States
19 March 2009

From the trailers of Knowing you'd be convinced that you're going to watch a cheesy, try to save the world picture with a wound tight Nicolas Cage at the center gritting his teeth and ducking his way to the perfect ending. Well, you'd be partially correct. Cage is definitely giving his wound tight hero routine that he's worked so hard to develop over the last half dozen films. As for the cheese factor, that's where you'll be surprised. Director Alex Proyas manages to deliver a rather decent sci-fi flick that has plenty of suspense and intelligence.

The plot turns around John Koestler (Nicolas Cage), an MIT astrophysics nerd turned Indiana Jones when a time capsule is discovered at his young son Caleb's (Chandler Canterbury) school. Inside are drawings from students in 1959 predicting what things would be like in 2009 some 50 years later. The drawing that Caleb comes home with isn't a drawing at all but a series of seemingly random numbers. Koestler becomes obsessed with the numbers and their meaning or what they seem to mean. The whole thing shakes him to his scientific core and a quest has begun.

The film is very lucky to have director Alex Proyas from films such as Dark City which is his true geek film and critical acclaim as well as I, Robot and Garage Days. The visual and special effects are outstanding. It was surprising how much suspense was in the script (Ryan Douglas Pearson and Juliet Snowden) which gave the film a real thriller atmosphere which continues to build in tone as the mystery is unraveled.

I admit I went into this film expecting a rehash of National Treasure on a more global scale. The sci-fi aspect of the premise is very well thought out and told. The acting by co-stars (Chandler Canterbury, Rose Byrne and Lara Robinson) are solid performances and stand in complementary contrast to that of the tightly wound Nicolas Cage. The geek factor of Knowing is rather high with lots of number configurations and what-if scenarios which is great for the sci-fi fans. At times your brain may have to turn on in order to follow the film, but that is what made Knowing such a pleasant surprise to me.*

Was the above review useful to you?

370 out of 680 people found the following review useful:

There's nothing like Knowing!

8/10
Author: chodebalm-1 from United States
15 March 2009

First of all, yes I did see this movie, and no I'm not much of a talker when it comes to discussing and reviewing movies. Therefore, I will keep it short and simple.

Nicholas Cage's movies have lately been a lot of action flicks that may or may not seem like movies we've all seen before. This one, however, brings a new fresh feeling to this genre.

I think we've all seen the whole "I see it coming" type of movie where the main character has to prevent something from happening. This is one of those, and yet it isn't. It doesn't bore you, it doesn't make you feel like you've seen it before, and yet you have a comfortability with it that intrigues you throughout.

I found myself quite entertained and the movie didn't lose my attention or have me checking my watch. Good direction and acting. Nicholas Cage does a good job.

I believe anyone who sees this movie will enjoy it for what it is. Go see it, it's a fun flick!

Was the above review useful to you?

157 out of 257 people found the following review useful:

OMG, what in the world

1/10
Author: EricBosarge from United States
29 March 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

Okay, this is a movie that I would classify as "I lost two hours of my life for this?" It was almost as if one person wrote the beginning, one person wrote the middle, and one person wrote the ending, and none of it meshes together at all. This movie has horror, religious, and sci-fi aspects that are all over the place. The first thirty minutes are okay, but it just plummets from there. There was not really any back story and it was kind of all over the place. The best part was when the lead female role was killed. Her whiny butt was getting on my nerves. The whole aliens are angels things was not put together very well at all, and the special effects were not that great. This would have been so much better if they had just concentrated on the story line and not have made it so goofy.

Was the above review useful to you?

129 out of 210 people found the following review useful:

I don't want to know!!!

1/10
Author: phantasmagoric-1 from United Kingdom
28 March 2009

*** This review may contain spoilers ***

If, like me, you expect films to have a cohesive plot, intelligent writing and an imaginative ending then this is NOT the film for you. What is the point of giving an astrophysicist a list of predictions and telling him when the world is going to end if there's nothing he can do about it? For the first two thirds of the film I was waiting for some clever twist or original storyline that would bring together all the disjointed pieces of the film but instead it ended in the most anti-climactic and least original way - aliens! The second worst cop out in history - the first being 'he woke up and it was all a dream'. It's not even poignant enough to be thought provoking or depressing; it's simply utterly pointless!

Was the above review useful to you?


Page 1 of 78:[1] [2] [3] [4] [5] [6] [7] [8] [9] [10] [11] [Next]

Add another review


Related Links

Plot summary Plot synopsis Ratings
Awards Newsgroup reviews External reviews
Parents Guide Official site Plot keywords
Main details Your user reviews Your vote history